Ethics, aesthetics, and morals

by onacruse 36 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  onacruse

  So, in the course of tonight's prolonged conversation with one of you JWD recalcitrants , I propose the following:
  

  If, in fact, this life, this life, is all there is, and nothing remains after...no resurrection, no reincarnation, no transformation, no metamorphosis; that is to say--these bags of salt, water (and a few hydrocarbons and genetic variations thrown in for good measure) are all that we are, and all that we ever will be, and then "poof":

  Why should we refrain from whatever brings the "greatest" personal pleasure to our measured and time-limited existence? Why not rob every bank, rape every woman, kill every man, squash every animal, burn every tree and plow every square inch of land, as long as it brings our personal human organism the greatest possible pleasure, for the duration of our limited existence?

  "Ethics" is not the answer, because ethics speaks to the coordination of multiple human beings in a social environment. Translate: "If I can get away with it, then I will." The only force of "ethics" is the fear of punishment. So, if I am sure that I can rob banks, rape women, kill men, squash animals, burn and plow indiscriminately, and (at the worst) pay a penalty I can "afford," then why not do so?

  "Morals" is not the answer, because that speaks to some objective standard to which I have ultimately to answer. But, if, in fact, there is no such objective standard (and who can absolutely prove that there is such a standard?), then I have no need to provide such answers, or even concern myself with such questions.

  "Aesthetics" is not the answer, because it speaks to the "beautiful" of life, the "things as they ought to be." But who defines "things as they ought to be"? Just, and no more than, pure social conditioning, including 'what we were raised to be.' Purely extraneous, and superficial. If the first faces, and the first sounds I heard, were hyena, I would think of myself as a hyena, and behave like a hyena.

  Legal systems and religious systems are simply a subset of the above.

  So, my question is:

  Why should I not simply do whatever I want to do?

  Craig
• 

  FlyingHighNow

  Maybe because you love people?
• 

  Preston

  In every face, and every hint of life on this planet

  I see the face of God

  the proof of love

  and the knoweldge there is a benevolent force working through us

  and connects every person, place and thing

  Everybody has a name

  - preston
• 

  Lady Lee

  Interesting question

  For myself, I have realized that what I may want in this moment may not be in my best interests in the long run. I choose to live as ethically as I can by my standards. I choose to live by my moral standards.

  I have made so many mistakes by ignoring the larger picture and ignoring my gut feelings and going ahead with my emotions. Sometimes I hurt others. Most often I wound up hurting myself. And sometimes both.

  When I choose to live by the moral and ethical standards that I have determined for myself I find they include what most people would claim as religious or legal dictates.

  I don't need a law or a religious code to tell me what is right or wrong. I listen inside and I know.

  Now the trouble with this is the standards of people will greatly differ depending on what others have been taught.

  But I don't want to change the world. That is beyond my abilities. I have enough trouble trying to live up to my own standards. And that is probably why I have such a hard time accepting the standards of anyone else as a gauge of what I should or should not do.

  To they own self be true. Not easy to figure that out sometimes. My lesson: Listen and wait if I'm not sure
• 

  onacruse

  FHN:

  Maybe because you love people?

  In the context of this thread, I would have to ask: So what? I do think (and attempt to conduct my life in accord with the principle) that "love your neighbor as yourself" is perhaps the most poignant statement in the NT, but even so, if I have no life to live but this life, then why, and how, does it matter whether I 'love my neighbor'? Preston, you insinuate that there is a communality of being, a subliminal connection of some sort. Can you prove it? If so, how? If not, then we revert to the issue of "survival of the most fit," and you could call me a Ken-Lay-wanna-be.
• 

  xenawarrior

  Why should I not simply do whatever I want to do?

  Cuz yer married and your wife will kick yer ass !!!
• 

  willy_think

  It was one of my favorite French philosophers, Camus, who said in his fictional work The Stranger, "We stared at each other without blinking, and everything came to a stop there between the sea, the sand, and the sun, and the double silence of the flute and the water. It was then that I realized that you could either shoot or not shoot."

  If there is no reason maybe society should make up a belief system to control that kind of behavior.
• 

  FlyingHighNow

  but even so, if I have no life to live but this life, then why, and how, does it matter whether I 'love my neighbor'?

  Okay, it matters because if this life is all we get and you make others miserable then it matters to them. If you murder someone you take away their only chance to live. Maybe you wouldn't care, but they care and those that love them care. I guess it boils down to whether you are a kind and loving human being who makes the existence of others more enjoyable; or you are a sadistic psycho who exists only for your own pleasure.

  What proves to me that this is not all there is, is the extraordinary amount of love we feel for our children, families, friends and the unspeakable pain we feel when we see them suffer or lose them to death. Watch a baby sometime and tell me this is all there is.
• 

  NewSense

  Onacruse:

  The question you raise is actually an ancient one; one of the oldest in Western philosophy. The ancient Greek atomists and materialists (i.e. Democritus), the Sophists (i.e. Gorgias and Protagoras) and the Epicureans all dealt with the various ideas and notions that you mention in your post. There is, most likely no absolutely definitive answer, the reason being simply that there are no absolutes.

  In a nutshell, what is (should be) the basis or foundation or our "morality"? Perhaps the answer lay in the etymology, the root meaning, of the words "morals" and "ethics." In point of fact, both are Greek words; "ethos" and "mores" both designate "customs." What is "moral" and what is "ethcial" has always been what is customary. Local customs and norms have always determined what is "ethical" and what is "moral." The ancient Greek sophists realized more than thousand years ago that what is accepted - even expected - in one place may well be absolutely forbidden and punishable in another place. As Protagoras said, "Man is the measure of all things."

  Religious leaders and clergy of all faiths have consistently been hostile to materialism and related philosophical systems. In your post, you have raised an ancient "quarrel" that has been in the Western philosophical traditon for more than two millenia. The quarrel pits dogmatic founationalists against the relativists sceptics. It pits materialsits against theists.

  I suppose that if you were to really insist upon an answer, I would say that you should conform to what is expected by the local community in which you live, your society. If you conform, things will go smoothly for you. If you break the norms, society will impose sanctions on you. What do you feel about this eventuality? Could you deal with the hassles? Would you be sadder, or happier, for facing society's wrath?
• 

  blondie

  I suppose that if you were to really insist upon an answer, I would say that you should conform to what is expected by the local community in which you live, your society. If you conform, things will go smoothly for you. If you break the norms, society will impose sanctions on you. What do you feel about this eventuality? Could you deal with the hassles? Would you be sadder, or happier, for facing society's wrath?

  Good answer, NewSense. It brought back my philosophy days. I was going to say that we live in a community. To have peace we must conform to some degree. Communities do differ as to "customs," some more rigid than others.